Consider the rationale for using Kant’s Deontology Theory, and Utilitarianism Theory. Compare the rationales and describe how the theories differ based on this case.

Adam Nash was born in Colorado on August 29, 2000. He had been an embryo that was sorted, screened, and selected from at least 12 embryos from the Nash couple, Lisa and Jack, for the purpose of tissue matching for their critically ill daughter, Molly.

Molly Nash was born to the Nash parents on July 4, 1994, with Fanconi anemia, a fatal autosomal recessive bone marrow failure (aplastic anemia), which is treatable only with a bone marrow transplant from a sibling’s umbilical cord blood. At the time, the success rate of a bone marrow transplant from an unrelated donor was only 42%, but from a sibling, the success rate increased to 85%.

The Nash parents, with support of physicians, made the decision to have preimplantation genetic testing on their embryos in the hopes of saving their only child. In the process, 12 of Lisa’s eggs were fertilized by Jack’s sperm via IVF; two of the embryos had Fanconi anemia and were discarded. Of the remaining 10 embryos, only 1 matched Molly’s tissue. This one became Adam Nash.

Data from Grady, D. (2000, October 4). Son conceived to provide blood cells for daughter. New York Times, p. 24. https://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/04/us/son-conceived-to-provide-blood-cells-for-daughter.html

ANSWER

Ethical Analysis of Adam Nash’s Case: Kant’s Deontology and Utilitarianism Perspectives

Introduction

The case of Adam Nash’s birth, designed to provide tissue-matching for his critically ill sister, Molly, presents a complex ethical dilemma. Two prominent ethical theories, Kant’s Deontology and Utilitarianism, can help us understand and analyze the rationales behind this case while highlighting their differences.

Kant’s Deontology

1. Rationale for Using Kant’s Deontology:
Kantian ethics, proposed by Immanuel Kant, emphasizes moral duties, principles, and the inherent worth of individuals. It provides a framework to evaluate actions based on their inherent moral value rather than their consequences.

2. Application in Adam Nash’s Case:
From a Kantian perspective, the Nash parents’ decision to select an embryo to save Molly could be seen as problematic. Kant’s deontological theory asserts that individuals should be treated as ends in themselves, not as means to an end. In this case, one could argue that Adam was conceived and selected primarily as a means to save Molly, which raises ethical concerns about treating him solely as a tool for his sister’s benefit.

3. Differences from Utilitarianism:
Kant’s Deontology is deontic, focusing on moral principles and duties irrespective of the consequences. It may prioritize individual autonomy and dignity over the potential benefits to the greatest number. Therefore, Kantian ethics might criticize this case for potentially violating Adam’s autonomy.

Utilitarianism

1. Rationale for Using Utilitarianism:
Utilitarianism, proposed by philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, evaluates actions based on their consequences and aims to maximize overall happiness or utility.

2. Application in Adam Nash’s Case:
Utilitarianism could justify the Nash parents’ decision as it seeks to maximize overall well-being. In this case, the potential happiness generated by saving Molly’s life through Adam’s birth might outweigh any moral concerns about his conception and selection.

3. Differences from Kant’s Deontology:
Utilitarianism focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number and can sometimes justify actions that may seem morally questionable when evaluated from a deontological perspective. In this case, it prioritizes the well-being of Molly over the potential moral concerns regarding Adam’s autonomy.

Conclusion

The case of Adam Nash’s birth presents a challenging ethical dilemma, and the choice between Kant’s Deontology and Utilitarianism highlights the tension between principles and consequences. Kantian ethics emphasizes individual autonomy and moral principles, potentially criticizing the case for instrumentalizing Adam. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, focuses on maximizing overall happiness and may support the parents’ decision to save Molly’s life, emphasizing the consequential benefits.

Ultimately, the ethical evaluation of this case depends on one’s perspective and ethical framework. It underscores the complex nature of ethical decision-making, particularly in cases where individual well-being and moral principles intersect.